Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON WHETHER BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT CAN BE MADE FOR DEFAULT IN FILING GSTR-3B? 155/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON WHETHER BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT CAN BE MADE FOR DEFAULT IN FILING GSTR-3B? 155/2020-21
The concept of best judgment assessment is new to indirect taxation and appears to have been borrowed from direct taxes. Section 62(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 provides that where a registered person fails to furnish return under section 39 or section 45 even after service of a notice under section 46, the proper officer may proceed to assess the tax liability of the said person to the best of his judgment taking into account all the relevant material which is available. Recently, an interesting decision was passed by the Appellate authority in the case of M/s OMSAI PROFESSIONAL DETECTIVE & SECURITY SERVICES (P.) LTD. [2020 (121) TAXMANN.COM 192 (AA-GST-AP)] wherein it was held that best judgment assessment cannot be done in respect of non-filers of GSTR-3B. The reasoning adopted and the implications of this decision are the subject matter of consideration of the present update.
                            
The appellant has been filing GSTR-1 returns by declaring outward taxable supplies under GST but have not filed GSTR-3B returns and has not paid the applicable taxes on its outward supplies as declared in the returns in GSTR-1. The assessing authority issued notices to the appellant for filing GSTR-3B but the appellant failed to file the same. Consequently, the assessing authority passed best judgment orders under section 62 of CGST Act, 2017 by enhancing the value of supplies declared in GSTR-1 by 50%. The appellant submitted that the reason for not filing GSTR-3B was the cash crunch faced by them. It was also submitted by the appellant that the conditions for invocation of provisions of section 62(1) were not satisfied as one of the conditions is the failure to furnish returns under section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. It was submitted that as per section 39, returns specified are GSTR-1, GSTR-2 and GSTR-3 and GSTR-3B is not a return prescribed under section 39. Reliance was also placed on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/S AAP & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2019-TIOL-1422-HC-AHM-GST] wherein it was held that GSTR-3B is not a return under section 39.
 
The appellate authority held that enhancing the value by 50% on ad-hoc basis reflects the arbitrariness of the assessing authority in passing best judgment assessment. The appellate authority placed reliance on various decisions of Income Tax/Sales Tax wherein it was held that best judgment assessment is not a wild assessment. Best judgment order must be founded upon some rational basis, relevant material and logic and should not be based on presumptions and guess work. Any best judgment assessment must be supplemented by reason, because reason is the heart beat of any conclusion and fetches clarity in conclusion of any order, as such, without the reason best judgment orders becomes lifeless and amounts to denial of fundamental justice. The Hon’ble High Court also conceded that the GSTR-3B cannot be considered as a return under section 39 of CGST Act, 2017 by placing reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/S AAP & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2019-TIOL-1422-HC-AHM-GST] . Therefore, the appeal was allowed by setting aside the best judgment order.
 
 It is pertinent to mention here that although the government has amended Rule 61(5) with retrospective effect by way of insertion of Proviso clearly stating that where return in Form GSTR-3B is required to be furnished by a person, then such person shall not be required to furnish return in Form GSTR-3 vide Notification No. 49/2019-CT dated 09.10.2019 nullifying the effect of decision rendered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and this fact was discussed also. However, still the Hon’ble High Court granted relief to the assessee by declaring the best judgment assessment to be arbitrary. This decision is of immense importance to the assessees for restricting invocation of best judgment assessment for non-filing of GSTR-3B return. 

This is solely for educational purpose. 
You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/as well as follow us on twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21and u may also follow us on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/ca-pradeep-jain-b6a31a16
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com